Legal Opinion · Dissent

Fifth Avenue Corp. v. Washington County

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 14, 1977No. 35-107, CA 5444; 35-107, CA 5444Published

petition for review pending

1DissentThornton, J.

I cannot agree with the majority holding that Washington County’s comprehensive framework plan is invalid because it was adopted by resolution and order rather than by ordinance.1

First, I can find no such requirement in the constitution and statutes of this state.

The applicable statute is ORS 215.050, which reads:

"The county governing body shall adopt and may from time to time revise a comprehensive plan and zoning, subdivision and other ordinances for the use of some or all of the land in the county. The plan and related ordinances may be adopted and revised part by part.”

As I read the above…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Baker v. City of MilwaukieOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Green v. HaywardOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Gingell v. Board of County CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
  4. Culver v. DaggCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975
  5. State Ex Rel. La Follett v. La FollettOregon Supreme Court · 1930

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API